Meeting of the Parliament (Virtual)

Meeting date: Thursday, February 11, 2021

Official Report 904KB pdf

---

Covid-19 Pandemic (Economic Impact on Women)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S5M-23756 in the name of Gillian Martin, on the impact of Covid-19 on women in the economy. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament recognises the impact of COVID-19 on women in the economy; understands that women in the Aberdeenshire East constituency and across the country have been more adversely affected economically by the pandemic, with the Gender Equality Index showing that they spent more time on housework and caring than men; notes the view that women should be supported as part of the economic recovery, and pays tribute to the work that has already been carried out by Women’s Enterprise Scotland, Engender and Close the Gap to make sure women’s voices are heard in the strive for a more equal wellbeing economy.

16:22  

There is no need to tell anyone that the past year has adversely affected every single one of us. The hooks of Covid-19 have gotten to everyone in one way or another: children have not been able to go to school for long; offices are closed; people have been ill and have lost loved ones, and many have lost their livelihoods.

We miss socialising with one another and crave a normal life, in which we can all get back to work, restart our lives and stop juggling home schooling with home working. We look forward to a future in which surviving financially is in our own hands and not based on the R number or the emergence of a new strain. The fact is that women have been the worst affected by the pandemic. All the inequalities to which women were subjected previously have increased, and the effects could be long lasting if we do not factor them into our recovery as a priority.

The statement that women are more likely to be in precarious work and low-paid jobs could be from two, 10 or 20 years ago. I say it now and add that other truism—that women are most likely to be the main carers for children and older relatives—and the indisputable fact that women still do most of the unpaid labour of maintaining a home and feeding a family. I also add in a pandemic.

Covid restrictions have affected everyone, but they have put more pressure on women in particular. From reports from equalities organisations and personal testimonies, we know that the woman in the household is most likely to be the one who gives up her job or business if the extra responsibilities that come with Covid get too much. I know that many couples take equal responsibility but, sadly, that is just not the case for the majority of them.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies found that in the first lockdown, on average, mothers did 50 per cent more unpaid childcare and housework than fathers. Let us not forget that the vast majority of single-parent households are run by women, and those women also have jobs or businesses. Women are more likely to be in the Covid front line, by working in health and social care or in supermarkets. Therefore, they are more exposed than anyone else to the virus.

We all know about the existing inequalities of the burden of unpaid care, the gender pay gap and persistent gender-segregated employment, but what a different experience the pandemic would have been for women if more serious effort had been made by society to eradicate such inequalities. However, we are where we are, and I will use my time today to point to ways in which we in Scotland can help to focus our recovery on stemming the widening inequality gap.

Before the pandemic, Scotland was on the cusp of doubling free childcare. We owe it to women in particular to make that a priority when the lockdown ends. For those of us who want to go further and expand free childcare in the same manner as our northern European counterparts, we must look again at the fiscal levers that are needed to facilitate that. If we have the levers ready—we have some, but by no means all, ready—we should use them to expand provision. If we need more such powers here, morally, every party that believes in free childcare expansion and gender equality must get behind the call for the increased tax powers that other countries use to fund their 100 per cent provision.

We also need to take a serious look at how we can get employment law devolved to the Scottish Parliament. I hope to see every party leader stand strongly behind the call to have the most effective levers of fair work in our own hands. In particular, I would like to see compulsory gender pay gap reporting stem from this Parliament, for such reporting to be strengthened to include more businesses, and for companies to be compelled to produce an action plan if they fall short.

I support the right of workers who have caring responsibilities to request agile and flexible working where appropriate, and for organisations to be compelled to prove that they have given the request serious consideration and made every effort to facilitate it.

I believe that we need to harness the few positive things that life with Covid has taught us. It turns out that we can work remotely, do not need to commute through traffic jams, and can be trusted to get on with our work without being in a physical workplace, being watched over by managers. With a bit of help, we can balance work and family life with little or no detriment to either.

However, we need to take targeted action now to make women central to the recovery, and we must not hesitate. Throughout this period, together with colleagues in Women’s Enterprise Scotland, I have been engaging with women business owners, and hearing testimony about how the types of businesses that are women run have been hardest hit. Close-working businesses such as fitness and hair and beauty, hospitality, tourism and events, catering and retail are the lifeblood of women’s role in the enterprise sector in Scotland. Women sole traders make a huge contribution to our economy, yet sole traders were almost ignored by the United Kingdom Government in the first wave of support. The Scottish Government has stepped in and provided newly self-employed schemes and targeted sectoral support; it is rolling out a close-working business package, and has enabled local authorities to give out discretionary funding to those whom other sectoral funding packages might have missed.

In the recovery, we need to do everything possible to bring back into business those women who have lost their businesses completely, or made the decision to quit due to other pressures. Government borrowing will be essential to that. We must be able to target our resources to ensure that a generation of women entrepreneurs find their way back, and better access to finance has to be part of that.

I am encouraged that so many members have offered to speak in today’s debate. I know that many members have been contacted by women in their constituencies with their stories and key asks, and I look forward to hearing about them. In particular, I thank Close the Gap, the Scottish Women’s Budget Group and Women’s Enterprise Scotland. I am also indebted to Dr Norin Arshed of the University of Dundee, whose excellent blog for the Scottish Parliament information centre is a vital read for anyone who is interested in how the pandemic has affected women’s business.

In closing, I stress one key thing: women’s financial parity is good for an economy. Let us prioritise everything that we can to close that gender pay gap and help women back into business and fair work to help us recover as a country.

16:30  

I congratulate Gillian Martin on securing the debate and bringing this important topic to the chamber, and I thank her for all the hard work that she does in raising awareness of these issues.

As the pandemic continues to affect lives and livelihoods, we can already see the regressive effects on women’s equality. A disproportionate number of women are managing additional demands at home, at work and in family life. As we learned from the Ebola outbreak, gendered norms mean that women are more likely to be infected by the virus, given their predominant role as care givers within families and as front-line workers in health, social care and education.

We all know that the virus does not specifically target women, but restrictions affect parts of the economy that are largely represented by women. Mikaela Williams is one of many of my constituents who have contacted me for help during this period. Mikaela is a self-employed complementary therapist with a husband and four-year-old child. During the first lockdown, Mikaela was eligible for the furlough scheme, but circumstances meant that she had no choice but to take on a temporary job with a supermarket. As restrictions were lifted, she was pleased to reopen her business but Mikaela has now had to close again. With her husband unable to be furloughed and the closure of schools and nurseries, she is struggling to find childcare to allow her to attend her employment. Having exhausted all options, she is having to think about resigning.

As reported by Engender, Mikaela is a clear example of the differential effect that the closure of schools is having on women, with the consequence of limiting their work and economic opportunities. It particularly affects lone parents—90 per cent of whom are women—due to the difficulties of working from home or finding employment. Additionally, research by Close the Gap shows that there has been an increase in the numbers of women who are in predominantly female industries, such as beauty, cleaning and childcare, and are self-employed, with no access to statutory employment rights.

In addition, assessment for financial support for self-employed women can be inherently unequal. Gemma Newell is an eyelash technician in my constituency with a 14-month-old child. She applied for the self-employed income support scheme, which took into consideration her maternity leave. Gemma was assessed to receive £400 every three months. We can all agree that that is not enough income to support a child and live on.

As convener of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee, it was crucial to me that we proceeded with an inquiry into the impact of the pandemic and, prior to the budget, consideration of the groups and individuals that were disproportionately impacted by Covid-19 and measures that should be taken to minimise negative impact on equalities and human rights.

The committee has been pursuing gender budgeting and distributional analysis for the best part of this parliamentary session. Each parliamentary year, the committee receives submissions and hears evidence on the need for the Scottish Government to take account of the impact of tax-raising and spending decisions on women specifically. This year has been no exception, and Covid-19 has further compounded the urgency to address those issues.

Furthermore, the Scottish Women’s Budget Group highlighted that the decisions to delay increased provision of early years childcare and the implementation of the Scottish child payment are likely to have had a disproportionate impact on women, particularly in single-parent households.

Spending on childcare and social care must be treated as infrastructure spending, because it supports the realisation of women’s equality and rights, but it is not just about fairness to women. More equal societies are better for everyone.

As we continue to endure the pandemic, we must have a focus on enhancing women’s economic position. Without a gendered approach being taken that recognises the reality of women’s lives, it is likely that women’s equality and rights will remain disadvantaged and might even slip backwards. It has been shown that what is good for women’s equality is good for the economy, so ignoring the position of women is not an option. We have all the information and evidence that we need to deliver meaningful and measurable change for women for Scotland. If we add to that the right political will, we can make a real difference.

16:35  

I, too, thank Gillian Martin for bringing this important issue to the chamber today. We all know how tough the past year has been and, without a doubt, the impact has been more pronounced for women. Whether it is home schooling, having caring responsibilities, holding down a job or running a business—or, indeed, in some cases juggling all four—women have been disproportionately impacted.

Entrenched gender inequalities are systemic across every aspect of the economy and they continue to create an uneven playing field. The pandemic has genuinely exacerbated that. I resonate with the example that Ruth Maguire gave, as it mirrors a situation that I had with a constituent who is a single mother; she had to quit her job because she was not classed as a key worker and was not able to work from home.

We must remember that, although we are focusing on women today, there are many other inequalities that are worsening due to Covid, such as the disability employment gap and health inequalities associated with black and minority ethnic communities. A Trades Union Congress report found that the employment rate for disabled women is 53.2 per cent compared with 75 per cent for non-disabled women. The Scottish Conservatives are committed to seeing that gap narrowed.

I was pleased to welcome the publication recently of “Unequal impact? Coronavirus and the gendered economic impact”, which is a UK Parliament Women and Equalities Committee report that seeks to address these issues. It acknowledges that the UK Government acted quickly to design and implement schemes to protect jobs such as the coronavirus job retention scheme and the self-employment income support scheme. Those UK-wide schemes have provided a vital safety net to millions of people, including thousands of women in Scotland.

Yet it remains the case that, despite those measures, women continue to be disproportionately affected. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs statistics show that, in most countries and regions, more women than men were furloughed as of 31 July last year. Engender highlighted that too. During lockdown, mothers have reduced the paid work that they do compared to fathers and are already 1.5 times more likely than fathers to have lost their jobs or quit their jobs over lockdown.

In its report “Gender and Unpaid Work: the Impact of Covid-19 on Women’s Caring Roles”, Engender estimates that the impact of mothers’ lost earnings on productivity is a staggering £15 million lost to the economy every day in Scotland. Those stark figures are underpinned by a McKinsey report that states that, despite women making up 39 per cent of employment globally, job losses among females have accounted for 54 per cent of job losses overall, with women’s jobs being 1.8 times more vulnerable to the current crisis than men’s.

Moreover, the IFS estimated that women were a third more likely to be employed in sectors that were shut down and were at a higher risk of job loss. Employment such as retail and hospitality, as highlighted by Gillian Martin, have been and continue to be adversely affected. I say gently that it does not help when Governments fail to recognise that businesses that employ women are on their knees. Next week, we will see burdensome licensing regulations brought forward by the Scottish Government without an impact study on how that will adversely affect women from Aberdeenshire to the Scottish Borders, such as those who operate a bed and breakfast to top up their income. We all know many of those women.

That, combined with insufficient grant funding and awkward application criteria, has resulted in many female business owners struggling to protect livelihoods in Scotland. I believe that more could be done to protect women in business through the speedy payment of grant funding, an adaptation period or more targeted funding to support sectors on which women rely heavily for their income.

Many young people have been adversely affected and many young women find it difficult to find jobs. They are leaving school and going into a slumping economy, and the number of young people claiming unemployment-related benefits increased by 122 per cent between March and July.

We must also recognise that there is a greater need to place equality at the heart of employment interventions to support women returners to work. Although today is the international day of women and girls in science, women continue to be underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and maths modern apprenticeships. We must take bolder action to recruit, retain and progress women across STEM disciplines.

As green shoots start to emerge in our recovery from the pandemic, we must not forget its impact on women. We cannot ignore the fact that they continue to experience inequalities, which is why we should ensure that we tackle gender bias and support the next generation of women, who will play a key role in building back our economy.

16:40  

I, too, welcome the debate and thank Gillian Martin for lodging her motion, which draws attention to this critical issue.

Before the arrival of Covid-19, women were already experiencing widespread economic inequality—for example, in their labour market participation and their income and living standards—and the pandemic has only exacerbated that. A vast amount of research, much of which has already been quoted by other members, demonstrates that, necessary though the lockdown measures have been to keep us all safe, they have had a disproportionate long-term impact on women, especially working-class women, significant numbers of whom now face redundancy and job losses.

Although furlough rates for men and women have been similar, analysis by HMRC shows that men placed on the job retention scheme have been more likely than women to be retained by their employers. The highest rates of furlough have been in two female-dominated sectors, retail and hospitality, both of which are characterised by low pay and job insecurity. Two thirds of workers who earn less than the living wage are women, which means that they receive only 80 per cent of their usual income while being furloughed, putting them well into poverty. Lone parents, of whom 91 per cent are women, are especially likely to struggle to combine childcare and paid work, and they are much more likely to be in debt and financially vulnerable. We also know that single-income households are more likely to be in poverty and less likely to have someone to share childcare responsibilities.

It is startling to note that the gender equality index finds that 85 per cent of people aged from 16 to 64 who are economically inactive due to caring responsibilities are women. The closure of schools and nurseries has inevitably resulted in increased care demands, and that increase in unpaid housework and care has been a significant factor in women exiting the work force.

Carers of people with disabilities are also disproportionately likely to be female. As I have said in the chamber on previous occasions, we know that, with many disabled people losing their support packages, it is women who have to step in and take over the caring responsibilities for them. In my constituency, I have been dealing with a lady who has an important role as an essential worker and is also a carer for her adult sister. Her access to a local day centre was withdrawn and, with no thought for her own welfare, that essential worker has taken on a significant caring responsibility. That example has been repeated all over the country.

It is difficult for women to balance home working with childcare. The lack of flexible jobs poses a more significant barrier to employment and progression for women than it does for men. According to research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, during the pandemic women with caring responsibilities in paid work have reduced their paid working hours substantially. Some 78 per cent of unpaid carers report having to provide more care than they were doing prior to the coronavirus outbreak.

The IFS data also shows that mothers who have left paid work over lockdown are continuing to do twice as much domestic work as their partners. By contrast, when a father in an opposite-sex couple stops working, both parties tend to share childcare even when the mother is still doing five hours’ paid work a day on top. The extent of unpaid work is a key determinant of women’s capacity to take part in the formal labour market, so it is essential that additional support is provided for women with caring responsibilities.

As we have begun to look towards recovery, we have talked a great deal about a greener, fairer future. While women are still disadvantaged in this way, the future cannot be fairer for all. We should measure the progress of a community by the degree of progress that women have achieved. The pandemic has set that back. We therefore have much work to do, and we must measure what we do if women are to make up the ground that Covid has stolen from them.

16:44  

Like others, I thank Gillian Martin for bringing the debate to the chamber. I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests recording that I am an unremunerated director of McQuick Ltd and a member of Unite the union.

There is no doubt that the impact of the pandemic has been felt differently across our society, and the evidence all points towards growing inequalities. That runs counter to the founding principles of our Scottish Parliament, and politicians from across the chamber have raised all sorts of concerns about weaknesses and gaps in policy responses to the pandemic on behalf of women in our constituencies.

In looking at the impact of the economic and public health crisis on women, I refer colleagues to the UK Parliament’s Women and Equalities Committee report, which was published on Tuesday and which has already been mentioned by Rachael Hamilton. In its report, “Unequal impact? Coronavirus and the gendered economic impact”, the committee leaves us in no doubt that, to date, the UK Government has failed to look at the differential impact of key Covid-19 interventions on women. The furlough scheme, the support for small businesses and the new initiatives around kick-start and green recovery show no sign of understanding the need for impact assessments and strong mitigating measures.

The report calls on the Department for Work and Pensions to conduct research to understand the gendered impact of the design of universal credit and adds the committee’s voice to the call, which many of us support, for the extension of the £20 increase in the universal credit allowance beyond the end of March. Undoubtedly, if that £20 top-up is not extended, it is women who will go hungry, it is women whose health will suffer and it is women who will be cold and ill prepared for the bad weather, because women will always make feeding their children the priority.

Two excellent and effective national campaigning organisations, Maternity Action and Pregnant Then Screwed, have welcomed the committee’s recommendations that the UK Government should urgently introduce legislation

“to extend redundancy protection to pregnant women and new mothers.”

I am sure that pregnant women and new mothers here in Scotland will have had the same experience of increased discrimination, including loss of work, breaks in contracts, and isolation for new mums. Today’s debate needs to focus on those issues as experienced by women in Scotland. Mitigating measures can be taken here and the trade unions and the fair work agenda must be at the centre of that response. For example, we should ensure that procurement and commissioning contracts protect women and provide sufficient budgets for full maternity cover. This could also be a chance to rethink the childcare packages that are on offer.

The commitments on the provision of childcare for three to five-year-olds were certainly welcomed by Scottish Labour but, for many mothers, support is needed well before their children reach the age of three. The economic infrastructure needs the care infrastructure to be good—a point that was well made earlier by Ruth Maguire. That would provide jobs and career opportunities for women in the social care and childcare sectors but, undoubtedly, childcare and support for babies and toddlers need to be moved up our agenda. I ask the minister, when responding, to give an indication of what specific consideration is being given to those women falling out of the labour market due to lack of support while pregnant and in those early years. Of course, Labour would be happy to work on a cross-party basis to identify the measures that can be taken in Scotland, with the powers that rest here, to maximise support for new mothers and their families.

I also wish to highlight the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights report on “Ethnicity and Poverty in Scotland 2020”, which observed that poverty strategies seldom integrate the experience of black and ethnic minority communities. In recognising the impact of the pandemic on women, we must also recognise that the pre-pandemic 2019 employment gap figures showed that the minority ethnic employment gap was much higher for women than for men.

The Westminster select committee report also emphasises the importance of improving data collection by sex. Understanding any differential impact of both the disease and the response to the pandemic on women and men is essential if we are to tackle sex inequality. Indeed, in response to a question from me on 3 March 2020, nearly a year ago, seeking assurance on the importance of disaggregating data by sex, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport assured me that the Scottish Government recognised that and would feed that view into the UK data collection plans.

Given what we have heard at Westminster this week, and in this debate, there is clearly much to do to develop policies that recognise that reversing these growing inequalities for women in Scotland is a matter of urgency. Once again, I congratulate Gillian Martin on securing the debate.

16:49  

I am pleased to contribute to this important debate, and I thank my colleague Gillian Martin for bringing it to the chamber.

As others have said, Covid-19 has been terrible for everyone. None of us has ever experienced anything like it and I hope that, when it is over—which I hope is soon—none of us ever has to go through anything like it again. However, there is no doubt that women are disproportionately affected, whether that is a result of juggling working at home and supervising home learning or simply having their employment disrupted.

As the helpful briefing from Close the Gap tells us, women make up 77 per cent of key workers in social care, early years and childcare, nursing and supermarkets, but they are grossly “undervalued, underpaid and under-protected.” Women are also more likely to work in sectors that have been shut down, such as hospitality and retail, and that is especially the case for BAME women and younger women.

Older women, too, have been impacted by the pandemic. The women involved in the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign, who suffered one of the greatest injustices to women that I can remember when the United Kingdom Government withheld their pension without notice, have suffered a huge increase in unemployment. Perversely, many WASPI women who are over 65 and who are still working are in the at-risk category but are required to keep on working, often in front-line roles in nursing, care and retail, because they now have no pension that would allow them to retire.

Data shows that, since July 2020, women have accounted for the majority of furloughed workers in Scotland. Gender inequality has never been more exposed than it has been during the pandemic. When the pandemic is over, we must not go back to the old way of working, with women being disadvantaged in the workplace and overworked at home. The subject is huge—too huge to be tackled in a short debate—but it is clear that we have reached a watershed and that we must move towards a gender-equal economy and start making plans for that now.

A recent survey on work and mental health during the pandemic revealed that workers from all sectors and backgrounds are struggling to cope with the increased workload and with separating work and home life. One woman said that she felt like she had

“2020 responsibilities at work and 1950s home responsibilities”.

She went on to say:

“I don’t want my daughter to see that it’s always mum that does these things.”

Of course, we all have male family members and friends who take an equal share of domestic responsibilities but, as we have heard, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has found that, in the first lockdown, mothers did on average 50 per cent more unpaid childcare and housework than fathers. Enough is enough. The debate has demonstrated vividly why we need to change a society that takes women for granted at all levels. This is 2021. Our daughters and granddaughters deserve a fairer future and they deserve to be recognised as equals in everything that they do.

16:52  

I thank Gillian Martin, who has taken the lead on many occasions in the Parliament on the issue of women, and I am pleased to support her debate. I have always supported the view that employment law should be devolved to the Scottish Parliament, so I support that, too. We have heard great speeches this afternoon highlighting women with disabilities, as Joan McAlpine did, BME women, as Elaine Smith did, and older women, as Rona Mackay did. It is important to talk about the diversity of women in our communities.

We know that women are carrying the burden of the crisis, with many having to juggle work and caring responsibilities. They are selflessly putting themselves before others and risking their health by working on the front line of the health crisis. As virtually all the previous speakers said, women are more likely to bear the brunt of the social and economic consequences of the pandemic. It is concerning that the United Nations secretary general has warned that Covid-19 could

“reverse the limited progress that has been made on gender equality and women’s rights”.

Women started the crisis from a position of economic disadvantage, and the pandemic has served only to deepen that. They are more likely than men are to be in precarious low-paid work. Data from the Resolution Foundation shows that only one in 10 lower earners are able to work from home, and that over two thirds of lower earners—69 per cent—are women. For those of us who have been able to work from home from time to time during the pandemic, it is staggering to learn that the vast majority of low-paid workers, most of whom are women, have not been able to do that.

It is therefore no surprise that women have borne the brunt of the unemployment caused by the pandemic. A report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that mothers in the UK are 1.5 times more likely than fathers are to have quit their job or lost it during lockdown.

We know that women’s work is undervalued, and for many women who have retained their jobs, women’s work continues to be systematically undervalued. That contributes in large part to the gender pay gap, whereby there is often a discrepancy in the pay of women and men in jobs that require similar education and responsibility. Women make up 80 per cent of key workers in care, early years and childcare, nursing and our supermarkets. Not much has changed over the years. Unfortunately, those jobs are undervalued and underpaid, and we need to change that.

According to the Resolution Foundation, more than half of social care workers who are putting their health at risk during the coronavirus outbreak are paid less than the real living wage, which—outside London—is £9.30 an hour. Staff in that sector are four times more likely to be on a zero-hours contract than the average worker.

Since the start of the pandemic, there has been a surge in calls for people who work in care to be better appreciated and, crucially, better paid. In the current period, we have all had our eyes opened when it comes to the work that care workers do generally, and I hope that their situation will change for ever.

In a briefing for the debate, Oxfam noted the surge in caring responsibilities that Covid has caused and called for action to end the systemic undervaluing of care work as a national priority. I agree with that call.

Just last week, the independent review of adult social care in Scotland recommended the establishment of a national care service and concluded that the Scottish ministers need to have accountability for the delivery of social care. I think that there is consensus on the fact that we need a care service that puts people before profit, and Scottish Labour wants the pay of care workers to be increased to £15 an hour.

Many of those women who are able to work from home have the added pressure of home schooling. Trying to home school even one child, let alone several, while attempting to work is an incredible burden that we have placed on families. Women say that it is almost impossible to finish any task because they have to deal with constant interruptions and are forced to ignore their kids or to stop getting their work done. One mother I know said that she feels as though she is failing at everything because she has so much to juggle. It is unfair for women to be placed in that situation on a daily basis.

There is a pressing need for us to consider refreshing our national childcare provision to ensure that we do not roll back on women’s rights and their ability to progress their careers. As Close the Gap reminds us,

“There is a significant risk that the increase in caring responsibilities will force many women to leave their jobs, affecting their income and career prospects, and ultimately placing women and their children at greater risk of poverty.”

Women in the Parliament have debated such issues over the past five years. Between us, we have set out the challenges for whichever women represent their communities in the next session of Parliament. I am pleased and proud to have taken part in Gillian Martin’s debate.

16:57  

I, too, thank Gillian Martin for securing this important debate and for the many considered, informative and heartfelt experiences that my MSP colleagues have laid out this afternoon. They have covered many of the issues that I might have spoken about, so I will move on and try not to repeat some of the great messages that we have already heard.

It was more than 20 years ago when I was studying economics as part of my degree that I first became aware of Marilyn Waring and her seminal book, “If Women Counted”. At the time, it shook the core of economic theory and perceived wisdom. The book was influential in tackling the methodology of the international standard of measuring economic growth. It challenged why travel to work was an economic activity but caring responsibilities were not. It persuaded the United Nations to redefine gross domestic product, inspired new accounting methods across the world and brought feminist economics to a mainstream audience. Indeed, J K Galbraith said of it:

“no concerned man or woman can ignore it.”

The debate to which Marilyn Waring’s book gave rise should be of concern to everyone, as it is essential to the economic success and the wellbeing of our nation. Twenty years ago, her book changed our view of work, and we can be glad of that.

The existence of the gender equality index that is referenced in Ms Martin’s motion is testament to the impact of Marilyn Waring. In her parliamentary career in New Zealand, she framed the country’s values and influenced exceptional policies on equal pay and environmental issues. She was also pivotal in the declaration of a nuclear-free New Zealand. She gives us an example that we should aspire to and she shows what can be achieved with leadership and political will. Today, we look at the advances on gender equality in New Zealand as an example of what is possible.

There is absolutely no doubt that the challenges that have been outlined by Ms Martin and many other colleagues this afternoon are understood. We often talk about the symptoms, but we need to examine the underlying causes as well—the societal inequality and the gendered roles that exist, which Covid has only exacerbated and laid before us. It is right that they have been brought to the chamber for debate today.

As has been mentioned, today is the United Nations international day of women and girls in science. As a scientist, I have spoken in the chamber many times about the underrepresentation of women in STEM and something else that is perhaps even more worrying—the endemic sexism that has led to the leaky pipe of women leaving science professions. That was highlighted in the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s report “Tapping all our Talents” and its update in 2018, and we must not let it fall from view or away from political attention.

We must do better in recognising the contribution of women in the professions, in the workplace and in their daily lives as they undertake caring responsibilities. We must recognise that their work counts and that low pay around gendered employment is systemic sexism that must be tackled. It leads to economic disadvantage that lasts a lifetime, with lower pensions following a life of lower pay.

As we reflect on the impact of Covid in our communities, it is clear that many women are engaged in key-worker duties that are low paid and are considered—I believe erroneously—to be low skilled. Other speakers have mentioned that. I also see the impact on BAME women. I see the economic and societal disadvantage that surrounds us and I reflect that those who are in jobs that we truly cannot function without need to be valued and recognised as we come out of the pandemic.

My experience as a councillor painfully reminds me of the failure of the job evaluation exercises across Scotland that saw a system put in place to undo some of the wrongs of the undervaluing of women’s work, yet led to more systemic inequality. Organisations that were paid by women to represent their interests sometimes let them down and it took years for that to be put right, most recently in the equal pay awards in Glasgow, which were made not exclusively but mainly to women.

I will finish by highlighting just one of the symptoms of that economic inequality—the national gender pay gap. In order to include New Zealand in a comparison, we have to move away from the European Union index and look to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. In its most recent report, which is from 2018, the UK had a gap of 16.4 per cent while New Zealand’s gap was 7.9 per cent, Ireland’s was 5.9 per cent and Denmark’s was 5.3 per cent.

One could easily draw the conclusion that small countries whose populations are similar to Scotland’s and that have the complete economic levers of a normal country are in a far better position to move towards gender equality and wellbeing. That is something that we should all aspire to.

17:03  

I join others in thanking Gillian Martin for lodging her motion, and I thank the other members who have taken part in the debate for their speeches.

I recognise the impact that the pandemic has had on women in the Scottish economy. I whole-heartedly agree that we must ensure that the position of women is properly considered and that they are properly supported as part of our economic recovery as we come through and out of Covid-19. How could we do anything else in these uncertain times, when women have been undertaking the majority of front-line roles? Those roles have rightly been recognised as essential; that they have been undertaken mainly by women must also be recognised. They include the roles in social care and retail that Gillian Martin mentioned when she opened the debate.

I join members in recognising the work done by organisations that powerfully articulate the voices of women on matters related to the economy. In particular, the work of Close the Gap and Engender has informed our understanding of the key issues affecting women during the pandemic and our approach to tackling them. Both organisations have contributed to the development of our gender equality index, and both participate in the gender pay gap working group, which I chair. That group has recently looked to repurpose some of the actions that were laid out in our gender pay gap action plan, with a specific eye to ensuring that they are appropriate and correct actions to take in responding to the impact of Covid-19. An update on those actions will be published in March.

I have always been clear that there is work to be done on this area, and that continues to be the case—Elaine Smith was quite correct to make that point. We should recognise that the pandemic has the potential to damage women’s employment opportunities in the longer term and to increase the gender pay gap in the coming years.

We know that the division of caring responsibilities exists and persists, and that is a challenge that we have to face head on. Women can be particularly impacted and put under pressure by school closures and increased care commitments, which might make it harder to maintain or undertake employment. The return of children to early learning and childcare and school, which is a priority for the Government, will help.

I am glad that the UK Government reviewed the guidance on the job retention scheme to make it clear that parents can be furloughed if they need to look after their children while schools are shut. I encourage all employers to support their employees’ needs in whatever way is required. We made that clear in the fair work statement on Covid-19, which we jointly signed with organisations such as the Scottish Trades Union Congress.

I will, of course, be gladder still if and when the UK Government announces an extension to the job retention scheme, which has been and should continue to be a key response in supporting the retention of employees during the pandemic.

We know that flexible working can be another mechanism that supports women and other workers with caring, home schooling or other commitments. Covid-19 has brought about a rapid move to flexible working and working from home wherever that has been possible, albeit that it has not happened in ideal circumstances. The Scottish Government has funded Flexibility Works and Timewise to provide advice and support to a range of businesses and employment organisations on flexible working and home working as a response to the Covid-19 crisis.

We continue to support employers to advance equality in the workplace through our workplace equality fund. Our recent round of funding is supporting 12 projects with more than £300,000 of investment, some of which is focused on supporting women to enter, remain in and progress in work.

Through our women in enterprise framework, we are fully committed to tackling the entrepreneur gender gap and we continue to support a range of initiatives to do exactly that. That includes supporting the ambassadors programme with Women’s Enterprise Scotland, which I thank for its work, and investing in the accelerateHER programme, which supports female-led companies to access finance and support.

We have allocated up to £15 million for a newly self-employed hardship fund, for those who have been failed by the UK Government’s self-employed income support scheme. The second round of funding will open for applications shortly. I mention that because a number of members made apposite and appropriate remarks about the need to support women who have been compelled to take on forms of self-employment by virtue of their circumstances. We will support more of the newly self-employed, who have been missed out by the UK Government’s support scheme.

Our range of employability support interventions recognises the increasing challenges that we are likely to see in the labour market, particularly for women. Members can be assured that those interventions are being developed and delivered with fair work, equality of opportunity and inclusion as central aims, and that a key element of our fair work activity is action to tackle the gender pay gap and create more diverse and inclusive workplaces. We are acting to support women in the labour market.

Our women returners programme supports women who have had a career break back into work. Projects focus on women who face multiple barriers. Twelve projects have been funded recently, some of which—the returners to finance programme, for example—support women in Aberdeen and the north-east. I am sure that Gillian Martin welcomes that focus on part of the country. I am sure that she also welcomes the energy transition zone in Aberdeen, which is creating around 8,000 training opportunities and building on the offshore wind skills mapping exercise to encourage and support women and others into employment.

We are also increasing the parental employability support fund by a further £2.35 million, which brings in-year investment to £7.35 million in total. That fund targets priority groups such as lone parents and, as Ruth Maguire mentioned, we know that the vast majority of lone parents are women.

Our young person’s guarantee, our national transition training fund, our fair start Scotland employability programme, our employability fund, the community jobs Scotland programme and our no one left behind activity will all have a huge role to play in supporting women in the Scottish economy as we recover from Covid-19. Through those activities and our wider approach to economic recovery, I believe that we will make a difference to supporting women and improving their position in the labour market through the Covid-19 pandemic.

However, I do not want members to feel that I have ended with a litany of self-congratulatory statements about what we are doing as a Government. I believe that what I have laid out and the direction that we have set out will contribute positively, but I return to my earlier point that I recognise that there is still much more to be done. Those who have contributed to the debate and—just as important, if not more important, perhaps—women throughout Scotland can be sure that with that recognition is a determination to do much more. My priority is that, as a Government, we will continue to ensure that we work concertedly to ensure that women are not disadvantaged by Covid-19.

I again thank Gillian Martin for lodging the motion and other members for their contributions.